[EL] Electionlawblog news and commentary 5/17/11
JBoppjr at aol.com
JBoppjr at aol.com
Tue May 17 15:11:46 PDT 2011
Very perceptive Steve. RSPAC complies with all applicable limitations,
prohibitions and reporting requirements of the Act. Not only have the federal
courts ruled that the contribution limits and corporate prohibitions of the
FECA are unconstitutional as applied to IE-PACs, the FEC has agreed with
this and in several advisory opinions have said so. See FEC AOs 2010-09
(Club for Growth) and 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten). So under the FECA, there are
no contribution limits on IE-PACs required by the FECA and, therefore, none
to comply with. This is hard money, because this is a federal PAC, so
federal officeholders can solicit these funds, just like they do for state and
national parties that do independent expenditures on their behalf.
Thank you for the compliment, but here I do not think I am pushing any
envelop. I am simply recognizing that two completely legal activities can
work together (1) that there are not limits on contributions to federal IE
PACs, and (2) that federal candidates and political parties can raise
money for any federally-compliment entity, including entities that do IE in
favor of the very candidate raising the money, to conclude that federal
candidates and political parties can raise money for IE-PACs. Jim
In a message dated 5/17/2011 4:57:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
steve at actblue.com writes:
As always, I'm impressed with Jim Bopp's ability to push the envelope.
Judging from the Politico article, it appears his legal theory is that the
funds solicited by federal officeholders to the Republican Super PAC are
raised in accordance with the limitations and prohibitions of BCRA since super
PACs were freed from these restrictions in the SpeechNow.org case.
Therefore, the solicitations don't run afoul of 2 U.S.C. 441i(e).
I wonder if Jim would be willing to share his thinking with the list. And
I wonder if other listers think this theory is correct. 441i(e)(a)(1)
prohibits solicitations "unless the funds are subject to the limitations,
prohibitions, and reporting requirements of this Act." Jim is correct when he
says the funds will be reported, but the funds are not subject to the amount
limitations and source prohibitions since the DC District Court declared
those limits unconstitutional as applied to contributions to super PACs. It
does not seem to me unconstitutional to apply the plain language of 441i(e)
to federal officeholders' solicitations, even for contributions to super
PACs.
--
Steven Gold
General Counsel
ActBlue
_steve at actblue.com_ (mailto:steve at actblue.com)
617.517.7636
_www.actblue.com_ (http://www.actblue.com/)
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Rick Hasen <_rhasen at law.uci.edu_
(mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu) > wrote:
May 17, 2011
"GOP 'Super PAC' seeks surplus cash"
Politico _reports_ (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55091.html) .
Posted by Rick Hasen at _08:30 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019514.html)
"Business groups to Obama: Drop order on contractor disclosure"
The Hill _reports_
(http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/161573-business-coalition-tells-obama-to-abandon-draft-contractor-order) .
Posted by Rick Hasen at _08:27 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019513.html)
Why is Kloppenberg Continuing the Recount?
In her _own words_ (http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/121958509.html) :
The recount has uncovered significant and widespread errors and anomalies
in the securing of ballots and recording of votes on election day. There
have been changes to vote totals in every county due to miscounted or missing
votes.
Many bags of ballots have been found to be essentially unsealed or ripped
to the extent that ballot security is compromised. A stack of ballots,
unbagged, was found in a clerk's office. Ballots were found in voting machines
where they had been left. Seal numbers on ballot bags and tags were not
recorded in the inspector's reports, creating doubt that the bags were
properly sealed on election night.
Touchscreen voting machine tapes were missing votes, or worse, were
entirely blank and had to be reproduced from machine memory to allow a recount of
the vote.
The most widespread and systemic errors and anomalies have been discovered
in Waukesha County. That county was already under a cloud, and this
recount has revealed more questions about elections practices there.
Posted by Rick Hasen at _08:22 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019512.html)
More Coverage of Eighth Circuit Opinion
_WSJ_
(http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/05/16/eighth-circuit-companies-must-disclose-campaign-spending/?mod=WSJBlog&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&u
tm_campaign=Feed:+wsj/law/feed+(WSJ.com:+Law+Blog)) ; _AP_
(http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/05/16/general-mn-corporate-donations-disclosure_8469018.
html) ; _Star Tribune_
(http://www.startribune.com/politics/121895804.html) .
It is interesting that all of these reports focus on the disclosure issue.
What I think is at least equally important is the Court's decision to
_uphold the ban_ (http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019498.html) on direct
corporate contributions to candidates.
Posted by Rick Hasen at _08:15 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019511.html)
"Public Citizen Seeks Silent Citizens"
Eric Wang has written _this oped_
(http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/16/public-citizen-seeks-silent-citizens/print/) in the Washington
Times.
Posted by Rick Hasen at _08:05 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019510.html)
Three Judge Federal District Court Issues Opinion in Redistricting
Challenge in Mississippi
See _here_
(http://www.scribd.com/doc/55555733/Order-NAACP-v-Haley-Barbour-Et-Al) .
Posted by Rick Hasen at _08:01 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019509.html)
"IRS Seeks to Impose Gift Taxes on 501(c)(4) Donors"
Harmon, Curran offers _this eUpdate_
(http://www.harmoncurran.com/?fuseaction=eUpdate.getArchives&newsletter_id=89) .
Posted by Rick Hasen at _07:57 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019508.html)
"At fundraiser, Obama introduced by civil rights hero who pleaded guilty
in campaign finance probe"
Josh Gerstein _blogs_
(http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0511/At_fundraiser_Obama_introduced_by_civil_rights_hero_who_pled_guilty_in_campaign_f
inance_probe.html) .
Posted by Rick Hasen at _07:50 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019507.html)
Quote of the Day
"Colbert Super PAC will also pay usual and normal administrative expenses,
including but not limited to luxury hotel stays, private jet travel, and
PAC mementos from Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus."
---Colbert Super PAC _Advisory Opinion Request_
(http://www.colbertpac.com/AO_REQUEST.PDF) to FEC
Posted by Rick Hasen at _07:48 AM_
(http://electionlawblog.org/archives/019506.html)
--
Rick Hasen
Visiting Professor
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
_949.824.3072_ (tel:949.824.3072) - office
_949.824.0495_ (tel:949.824.0495) - fax
_rhasen at law.uci.edu_ (mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu)
_http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html_
(http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html)
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola Law School
_http://electionlawblog.org_ (http://electionlawblog.org/)
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
_Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu)
_http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election_
(http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election)
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110517/fe46422d/attachment.html>
View list directory